Matchmaking Discussion [Merged Threads]

1303133353662

Comments

  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,560 ★★★★★

    Pulyaman said:

    Everyone keeps talking about the Rewards and here they are proud as peacocks that the Matches are uneven. The Rewards could have been dealt with. No, no. It's about watching the Allies with weaker Champs fail. 100% sport loss.

    It's really surprising that people seem to think that this change is going to elevate them so much. Even in @QuikPik analysis, how many alliances were there that were not supposed to be there? These guys were getting matched with almost equal war rating earlier too. What got them riled up was that they saw some lower rated alliances being places higher than them and it was raised every season. I agree that it was not an ideal system but doing it this way is also not good. Sorry for the comparison, telling the alliances getting huge mismatch that it will be better in a few wars is like saying to woman getting **** it will all be over soon.
    Yeah, I tried to point that out too. People think those Allies were taking up their spots, and they ignored their own performance. You can't go up winning only half the Wars.
    They were only winning half the wars because they weren’t fighting people at your tier but rather at your rating
    This system will allow higher allies to get to where they deserve
    The ally we fought last war was higher war rating then us and they were still placing 4* defenders they didn’t even get past the first section while I don’t blame them for the broken system how the hell did an ally that low get to such a high tier it’s just ridiculous
    They were only winning half the Wars against Allies of their own strength. So they decided they could win against Allies with weaker Champs. Slow clap.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,560 ★★★★★
    QuikPik said:

    Since most people don't read the entire thread, I'll leave this here yet again.



    The old system was breaking progression levels for a lot of smaller alliances. What are alliances that are still working on their 4* roster going to do with all the 6* shards, T5b, T2a and T5cc crystals?

    Those are Prestige levels you're looking at? My Alliance is just over 6000, and we are NOT working on 4* Shards. Not most of us anyway. Your assumption is wrong.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,560 ★★★★★
    People couldn't accept their own Win/Loss ratio, so they decided to blame it on people winning more of their own Wars. Bottom line.
  • edited July 2020
    This content has been removed.
  • This content has been removed.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,560 ★★★★★
    edited July 2020
    Ebony_Naw said:

    People couldn't accept their own Win/Loss ratio, so they decided to blame it on people winning more of their own Wars. Bottom line.


    You can keep saying that, doesn't make it true.
    Really? How many people here claimed they were stuck winning only half their Wars while smaller guys were going up? That's exactly the argument. If you win half and lose half, you're going to break even. If you're winning half and losing half and going up, something is seriously wrong.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,560 ★★★★★
    xNig said:

    QuikPik said:

    Since most people don't read the entire thread, I'll leave this here yet again.



    The old system was breaking progression levels for a lot of smaller alliances. What are alliances that are still working on their 4* roster going to do with all the 6* shards, T5b, T2a and T5cc crystals?

    Those are Prestige levels you're looking at? My Alliance is just over 6000, and we are NOT working on 4* Shards. Not most of us anyway. Your assumption is wrong.
    Looking at the Season rewards, 6k prestige should land somewhere between Silver 1 - Bronze 3. Gold 3 at the very highest.

    Having that many of them in Plat 4 to Gold 2 is just plain ridiculous.
    We're usually around Silver 1/Gold 3. Depends on how the Season goes.
    As for the Gold 2/Plat, they got there based on the history of their own Wins.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,560 ★★★★★
    QuikPik said:

    So is winning half and losing half but continually dropping down. There are 2 sides to every argument yet you only see one.

    I only see my own point of view because I'm not telling everyone else where I think they belong.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,560 ★★★★★
    Ebony_Naw said:

    QuikPik said:

    So is winning half and losing half but continually dropping down. There are 2 sides to every argument yet you only see one.

    I only see my own point of view because I'm not telling everyone else where I think they belong.

    Again, misconstruing the other side. No one is saying "this is where you belong." Rather, the argument is that in order to get to where you are, your matchups SHOULD increase in difficulty as you climb the leaderboards. But this post probably makes too much sense to respond to.
    You're not telling people where they belong. You're just telling them what they should go through to get there. It makes sense. It's the same thing.
  • -sixate--sixate- Member Posts: 1,532 ★★★★★

    I think you'll still see quite a few outliers at the end of this season. A lot of the upper mid alliances that have been fighting it out around Gold 1/2 will probably finish higher than they typically "should" this season. They're the ones that will probably have a higher amount of mismatches in their favor and will have quite a few wars with inflated points from opponents not clearing the map.

    So if your one of those alliances that ends up with a very padded season score at the end of this one, you shouldn't necessarily assume you'll be there are even close to there once matches even out more

    I agree with this 100%. I think it will take 2 or possibly 3 seasons to realy level the playing field.
  • Lvernon15Lvernon15 Member Posts: 11,598 ★★★★★

    I think you'll still see quite a few outliers at the end of this season. A lot of the upper mid alliances that have been fighting it out around Gold 1/2 will probably finish higher than they typically "should" this season. They're the ones that will probably have a higher amount of mismatches in their favor and will have quite a few wars with inflated points from opponents not clearing the map.

    So if your one of those alliances that ends up with a very padded season score at the end of this one, you shouldn't necessarily assume you'll be there are even close to there once matches even out more

    Yeah, those alliances have a much lower war rating than they would have if they weren’t facing strong high prestige alliances, so it’s basically the same effect as tanking, this season is going to be all over the place until alliances get into their real position for their strength skill and effort put into war, those alliances getting matched with much stronger alliances they just can’t win against will place lower since they’re getting a higher amount of losses, it’s a great change for the long term, it’s just going to mess up rankings for this season a bit
This discussion has been closed.